A63997:300
The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians…
The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians of our age: wherein is showed that the morality of the fourth Commandment is still in force to bind Christians unto the sanctification of the Sabbath day. Written by that learned assertor of the truth, William Twice D.D. late prolocutor to the Assembly of Divines.The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians of our age: wherein is shewed that the morality of the fourth Commandement is still in force to bind Christians unto the sanctification of the Sabbath day. Written by that learned assertor of the truth, William Twisse D.D. late prolocutor to the Assembly of Divines.
London: printed for Thomas Pierrepont, 1652
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Nor did the designing of a day expose the Church to any trouble, much less the designing the proportion of time; It being most requisite, the Law-maker should design each of these for the preventing of trouble; and each being thus designed, we find the designation of them to be most agreeable unto reason. If Torniellus thought it hardly credible that Enosh should apart himself from ⟨p. 195⟩the sons of Cain to call upon the Name of the Lord, without some certain and appointed time for that performance. I do not think that Doctor Prideaux conceives it credible, that any wise man would think it fit that the servant, and not rather the Master should apportion out that service which is due unto his Lord and master; or that it is more fit the servant should have the designation of the particular time rather then the master, the former reasons duly considered. Or is there any reason why Calvin should have so little authority, when he discourseth in reason for the original institution of the Sabbath, as from the Creation; and so great authority when he speaks upon his bare word against the morality of one day in seven (as some think) Septenarium numerum non ita moror, ut ejus servituti quicquam astringerem. It is an easy matter to say they conclude nothing; though I may justly wonder any reasonable man should say so of the argument drawn from those words Gen. 2.3. Therefore God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; the author alleging no other exception against it, but the interpretation of Tostatus, namely, that it is delivered by way of anticipation. For this is as good as to confess, that to bless and sanctify the seventh day, is all one as if he had said that God commanded it to be sanctified. Only they will not have it understood of that time, when the Lord rested from the works of Creation. So that the meaning of Moses must be this, In the seventh day God ended the works which he had made, and the seventh day God rested from all the works which he had made, and because God rested on that seventh day from all the works that he had made, therefore he commanded, not then that, that day from thence forward; but 2400. years after, that men should consecrate that day to divine service.
Nor did the designing of a day expose the Church to any trouble, much lesse the designing the proportion of time; It being most requisite, the Law-maker should designe each of these for the preventing of trouble; and each being thus designed, we find the designation of them to be most agreeable unto reason. If Torniellus thought it hardly credible that Enosh should appart himselfe from